Luke Timothy Johnson, lecturer of the Great Courses series, ‘The Story of the Bible,’ likened the historical critical method (higher criticism) to a Trojan Horse. It is dazzling in appearance. Therefore, you let it right into your camp. Once inside, however, it releases the seeds of your own destruction. This is because the historical critical method is based entirely on ‘critical thinking,’ which is all the rage today.
Probably, the phrase ‘critical thinking’ should be struck from the Christian vocabulary, since it defines the thought process of those who put all their trust in human science. Nothing against science here, but it is not something that should not be elevated over all else. It is also unsettling to hear modern calls to “believe the science,” since science is not a system of belief. Jehovah’s Witness published literature has never used the expression “critical thinking.” (nor any faith tradition, to my knowledge) Instead, it opts for biblical counsel to “let your reasonableness be known to all.” There’s no need to let narrow people define what it means to be “reasonable.”
Plenty of Witnesses use the expression innocuously and good conscience, but it is technically a tool of the “enemy.” It is the exact opposite of the apostle’s directive that “we are walking by faith, not by sight.” Not only is “critical thinking” the epitome of “walking by sight,” but it is walking by provable sight, specifically scientifically-provable sight. It is not simply the opposite of being gullible. It is a too-narrow definition of what it means to be smart. It ensures that you will miss a lot.
It has the effect of decimating faith because it examines only what is scientifically provable, and no tenet of faith is. Those who are trained this way in theology end up taking all spiritual beliefs off the table for consideration. They figure they have the tools to examine only the effects of faith on a person: that is, does a given belief system help or harm a person? Shelving the fundamental aspects of faith, it is left to examine only the secondary. The effect is to make religion an expression of human rights.
Just as higher criticism rules out examination of the resurrection or the virgin birth of Christ as being scientifically unprovable, so it rules out any consideration of an afterlife, or (for Witnesses) the notion of living forever on a future paradise earth. Not scientifically provable. Can’t go there. Passages like 1 Timothy 6:19 (instructions to the young man on how to shepherd the congregations) become meaningless:
“Tell them to work at good, to be rich in fine works, to be generous, ready to share, safely treasuring up for themselves a fine foundation for the future, so that they may get a firm hold on the real life.”
Since the “real life” is unprovable to the higher critics, and the present life is the only one they acknowledge, the Bible verse, at best, makes no sense, and at worst, becomes a harmful distraction from the present. Higher criticism vs traditional biblical reading are opposites. The “real life” to the higher critics is the present. The “real life” to the traditional Bible reader is the future. To the higher critic, pursuing the “real life” of 1 Timothy has relevance ONLY in how if affects a person in the present.
This insistence on examining only the immediate aspects of faith puts it at the mercy of changing human values. For the longest time, Witnesses received a green light as to benefiting in the present. Witness beliefs enabled them to break free of addictions and enjoy stable marriages, for example. But now, these benefits are being overshadowed by modern demands for “inclusion,” as well as an added savoring of “independence.” Even breaking free of debasing addictions doesn’t count if “someone told you to do it.” Plainly, Jehovah’s Witnesses put themselves under the relative authority of congregation headship. The fact that Christians did it in the first century as well is irrelevant. Plainly, Jehovah’s Witnesses do not practice “inclusion” for some increasing popular lifestyles. The fact that they beat everyone for inclusion towards races, ethnicities, economic and educational differences doesn’t cut it.
To be continued—here
****** The bookstore
Leave a Reply